Young v. Hawaii (CA9); en banc *STAYED* 2-14-19

[pacrat]

Originally Posted by wolfwood

If I am reading the en banc process right the Ninth did more than that. This week is the week where the en banc court decided the Young 11 judge panel. That is now locked in if I am right. Now the 5 trump appointees will not be part of the random en banc draw because that draw has already happened. So when Young is unstayed we will be left with a unfavorable left leaning panel. This is unfair both to Mr. Young and to the entire Circuit. As you mentioned the transport case is not even on point to deal with carry so it is unclear how that case deserves a sua sponte stay. The worst part is the parties were not allowed to submit their positions on this issue.

With recent events in Young v Hawaii. Seems like an appropriate time to repost #962 of this thread.

Judge Sidney Thomas is just another San Francisco 2A hating Democrat Politician.

Robert's claim that there are no political Judges on the Fed Bench is again proven to be a lie.

[surfgeorge]

As far as I know there is no required maximum amount of time between the announcement of the SCOTUS decision in NYSRPA and the time by which the scheduling of the oral arguments in Young must occur. What if, at any time before those orals are scheduled, or even after they are scheduled but before they take place (as is the current circumstance) SCOTUS accepts another case that might possibly peripherally implicate some potential aspect of an issue in Young? Can the Ninth just keep staying Young as long as any 2A case has been granted cert? I'm not gettin' any warm fuzzies from this...

[LVSox]

Originally Posted by pacrat

With recent events in Young v Hawaii. Seems like an appropriate time to repost #962 of this thread.

Sidney Thomas is from Montana, actually.

[LVSox]

Originally Posted by surfgeorge

As far as I know there is no required maximum amount of time between the announcement of the SCOTUS decision in NYSRPA and the time by which the scheduling of the oral arguments in Young must occur. What if, at any time before those orals are scheduled, or even after they are scheduled but before they take place (as is the current circumstance) SCOTUS accepts another case that might possibly peripherally implicate some potential aspect of an issue in Young? Can the Ninth just keep staying Young as long as any 2A case has been granted cert? I'm not gettin' any warm fuzzies from this...

In short, yes. It can stay the case for as long as it wants. It could hear argument and not render a decision for as long as it wants.

[pacrat]

Originally Posted by LVSox

Sidney Thomas is from Montana, actually.

And Obumma is from Kenya/Hawaii. Didn't stop his political corrupt career in Chitcago/DC did it?

[MarCat]

Originally Posted by wolfwood

If I am reading the en banc process right the Ninth did more than that. This week is the week where the en banc court decided the Young 11 judge panel. That is now locked in if I am right. Now the 5 trump appointees will not be part of the random en banc draw because that draw has already happened. So when Young is unstayed we will be left with a unfavorable left leaning panel. This is unfair both to Mr. Young and to the entire Circuit. As you mentioned the transport case is not even on point to deal with carry so it is unclear how that case deserves a sua sponte stay. The worst part is the parties were not allowed to submit their positions on this issue.

I am not surprised, but it is truly stunning.

How is it that the parties are not allowed to submit their respective positions, but the court is asked to to delay to for further briefings to allow more current and complete information about the matter in front of them?

[champu]

Originally Posted by Offwidth

Interesting delay tactic. Do they know more than we know?

As I said upthread, it’s not a delay tactic, it’s a “who gets the last word” tactic. They want SCOTUS to speak first and then they want to dance around whatever SCOTUS says to acheive their ends. They think they are better than SCOTUS.

[Phiremin]

Originally Posted by champu

As I said upthread, it’s not a delay tactic, it’s a “who gets the last word” tactic. They want SCOTUS to speak first and then they want to dance around whatever SCOTUS says to acheive their ends. They think they are better than SCOTUS.

Assuming they ever render a decision in this case at all.
If the SCOTUS decision is broad, Hawaii goes back and tweaks their laws slightly to “make them consistent with NYSRPA”.
Ok, we are “must issue”, but you may only carry a single shot flintlock on the 3rd Wednesday of the month not within 3 miles of a school. Oh, and you need $1 million in liability insurance and 90 hours of training (and it will take 2 years to write a curriculum and certify trainers).
...and the 9th circuit declares Young moot because the law on which the case is based changed.

The truth is 1 Supreme Court case isn’t going to matter. States and courts hostile to the 2A will tap dance around any ruling. The only thing that will make a difference is if SCOTUS gets active in smacking down these rulings.